-
I had a return trip [flight only] to New Orleans over New Year. A few weeks before, BA cancelled the return leg.
The replacement offered was either to change at an intermediate point or to wait until the next day.
We chose the next day as the whole point of flying with BA was the direct flight.
We had expected that – even though the notice was greater than the 14 days where compensation would kick-in – we would at least be able to claim right to care. Consequently, we claimed for a hotel night and food at dinner.
One of our group [separate booking] has had their claim for this denied on the 14-days argument.
Is BA correct, or should we push back?
BA is trying it on, push back.
I think BA is correct. They re-routed you, and you have the right to care due to the re-routing. You can also choose to be re-routed at a later date, but can’t expect BA to pick up the tab for your choice.
I’m sure others will have more experience, but EU261 does seem quite clear. I recently had a similar cancellation for an outbound flight, and chose the refund and booked tickets with a different airline. Cost me more money, and it sucks, but I can’t really blame BA.
@Ihar perhaps have a re-read of Art. 5
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2004/261/article/5 within 14 days only applies to compensation.One of our group [separate booking] has had their claim for this denied on the 14-days argument.
Is BA correct, or should we push back?
What exactly did BA say in their rejection?
Knowing that would help determine if BA are correct or not.
One of our group [separate booking] has had their claim for this denied on the 14-days argument.
Is BA correct, or should we push back?
What exactly did BA say in their rejection?
Knowing that would help determine if BA are correct or not.
The relevant paragraph: “ We’ve refused your claim for compensation and expenses because we told you about the cancellation at least 14 days before you were due to depart, using the contact details in your booking. Under EU legislation and The Air Passenger Rights and Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, we aren’t liable to pay compensation for this kind of situation.”
As you can see – although the claim was not for compensation – BA frames the response only about compensation.
Thanks all. I haven’t received a response yet – even though I submitted mine way before my friend’s. I’ve just seen her claim and she did mention compensation as well as right to care, so inadvertently gave BA an out. I only claimed the additional expenses.
I’ll report back, but the timings of my claim look like it might need to go to CEDR to elicit ANY response.
@Ihar perhaps have a re-read of Art. 5
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2004/261/article/5 within 14 days only applies to compensation.Sure. Let me give you my rationale… If BA *offered* re-routing the next day then YES it should pay under Article 9. If however the OP declined the indirect re-routing and instead elected to fly the next day, as per Article 8(1)(c):
(c) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at a later date at the passenger’s convenience, subject to availability of seats.
Then I would agree with BA insomuch that BA can’t be expected to pay for your hotel if you choose to take a later flight. I base that on Article 9:
(b) hotel accommodation in cases – where a stay of one or more nights becomes necessary, or where a stay additional to that intended by the passenger becomes necessary;
The key term here is necessary. If you elect for a later re-routing, then the stay is also elective and not on BA’s tab.If you were offered the next day then you need to say that explicitly, along that you are claiming for Right to Care and not compensation. Often the argument is that BA refuse to re-route you “at the earliest opportunity” on a different airline.
No idea why the airlines don’t just ask for a re-write of EU261. It’s like my Gran’s jumper – woolly and full of holes.
Passengers are entitled to get a non-stop service and if BA can’t offer that then Right to Care kicks in.
I’ve done BA MSY-LHR non stop on a new B781, it was a great flight and I had a good long sleep.
I had a cancelled BA flight in January, BA couldn’t kick in their re-routing procedures promptly enough which meant a night in a hotel and them giving up an opportunity for revenue on the flight I actually was re-routed on.
This cost them much more money.Passengers are entitled to get a non-stop service and if BA can’t offer that then Right to Care kicks in.
I would agree. But it isn’t what EU261 says. In fact it’s totally unreasonable for everyone to be re-routed directly, as I doubt there are enough seats without people being downgraded, moved to other airlines, etc. If BA offered a choice then good on them (and they should pay for the costs of the delay). I’m sure there will be plenty of passengers who were not offered such a choice.
@Ihar The thing is you get the choice of what you want to do. It is not up to the airline to decide for you. They will suggest a routing but you as the passenger can decline a flight that has been offered and suggest a reroute that suits you better subject to availability of seats.
The key is that when a flight is cancelled (which OP’s was) your rights per Article 5 are
1. In case of cancellation of a flight, the passengers concerned shall:
(a) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 8; and
(b) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 9(1)(a) and 9(2), as well as, in event of re-routing when the reasonably expected time of departure of the new flight is at least the day after the departure as it was planned for the cancelled flight, the assistance specified in Article 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(c); and
(c) have the right to compensation by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 7 unless
(i) they are informed of the cancellation at least two weeks before the scheduled time of departureIn the case of OP they stated right at the beginning that
“The replacement offered was either to change at an intermediate point or to wait until the next day.”They were offered and chose to wait until the following day. That means that BA is on the hook for Article 9 Right to care and that necessarily involves BA reimbursing meals and refreshments in a reasonable relation to the waiting time per Article 9(1)(a) and an extra night in a hotel per article 9(1)(b)
A passenger is not entitled to reject a rerouting (even if it’s indirect vs an originally booked direct flight) choosing to travel the next day and at the same time assume BA is liable for overnight accommodation and food. The usual legal tests apply so BA might be liable but equally might not be. Rerouting rights absolutely do not give you carte blanche to pick and choose from every flight that’s operating.
@JDB summarised perfectly what I was trying to get across.
So if the BA rep says “We can get you on a flight leaving at the same time connecting in XYZ (not YYZ!), OR we can get you on the same flight tomorrow – then I would expect BA to pay for care. However, if the BA rep says “We can get you on a flight leaving at the same time connecting in XYZ” and the passenger says “that’s not acceptable, I want a direct flight” then that’s invoking Article 8(1)(c) – i.e. the passenger’s choice. Not a “necessary expense”.
If BA say no, you might be able to claim on travel insurance – but I wouldn’t be surprised if they also said “no”
BA paid overnight accommodation and food costs dozens of times to me and my friends and family in the above scenario. You just need to present the case correctly. The problem with the denial is that they claimed compensation rather than reimbursment. It should also be claimed after the flight, not before.
And both @JDB and @lhar you have not read the original post:
“The replacement offered was either to change at an intermediate point or to wait until the next day.”
So it was BA that offered either or and it wasn’t passenger who asked. In all honesty, this has always been the case with BA, they usually offer the choice.
“The replacement offered was either to change at an intermediate point or to wait until the next day.”
So it was BA that offered either or and it wasn’t passenger who asked. In all honesty, this has always been the case with BA, they usually offer the choice.
I didn’t see these posts subsequent to my last until this morning, but I confirm that BA’s offer was exactly as I stated: take an indirect same day as original flight or wait until next day for the direct one. I did not reject anything, I just chose one of the options presented in MMB or whatever the disruption equivalent is called.
… if the BA rep says “We can get you on a flight leaving at the same time connecting in XYZ” and the passenger says “that’s not acceptable, I want a direct flight”…
I have had numerous BA cancellations and re-routings, the communications for re-routing have never taken this form.
BTW on my last re-routed BA SH flight, I claimed £3 for a BOB cup of tea from BA and this was paid.
BA even paid for alcoholic drinks with a lovely meal when they stranded me on Mykonos. BA do seem to let some claims through the net.The rejected person should go back to BA making clear that they are not claiming compensation, merely Duty of Care expenses. Mention the lack of time limit on that clause. It might work, if not ask for confirmation that their answer will not change and go to CEDR.
The rejected person should go back to BA making clear that they are not claiming compensation, merely Duty of Care expenses.
That’s what I’ve advised. Thanks!
To conclude this discussion and emphasise the importance of accuracy in distinguishing between Right to Care expenses and compensation, I received a confirmation call from British Airways, expressing its willingness to reimburse my expenses.
I had to provide my bank details, and I anticipate receiving the payment within the next two weeks.
AFAIK, my friend is still arguing…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Popular articles this week:
